Petition Pil

IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA CRIMINAL ORIGINAL JURISDICTION WRIT PETITION (Crl) NO.

OF 2017

(Petition under Article 32 of the Constitution of India) IN THE MATTER OF: Chandrasekhara Pillai.s & Anr

…Petitioners

Versus Union of India &Ors

…Respondents WITH

PAPER BOOK (FOR INDEX PLEASE SEE INSIDE)

ADVOCATE FOR THE PETITIONER: SHAHID ANWAR

INDEX

S.No 1. 2. 3. 4.

Particulars Listing Performa Synopsis & List of Dates Writ Petition with Affidavit. Annexure P-1

Pages A1 – A2 B1– 21

True Copy of the ‘Standing Committee on Defence (2008-2009) (Fourteenth Lok Sabha), Ministry of Defence on Stress Management in Armed Forces, Thirty First Report. 5.

22

Annexure P-2 True

copy

of

6413/15/A3

the dated

Circular

no.

19.01.2017

regarding ‘Dignity of serving soldier: Buddy Duties.

SYNOPSIS That the humble petitioners, who are ex army personnel running an association of ex army men in Kerala, alarmed by a concerted and a brazen attempt by certain serving delinquent officers in the army who have scant regard for the Rule of Law and human values, which they have witnessed first hand, have been constrained to Public

Interest

prefer the instant Writ Petition by way of

Litigation

(PIL)

under

Article

32

of

the

Constitution of India in order to ensure that the fair name, reputation, image, trust and respect of Indian army as one of the most humane and disciplined armed forces in the world is not jeopardised by the misconduct of a few delinquents in its ranks.

These

officers,

in

order

to

cover

individual

misdemeanours and commission of suspected crimes are seeking to misuse the fair name of Indian army as an institution. The instant matter is of great Public importance as such misconducts, coupled by some other recurring episodes of perceived unfairness, may lead to a feeling of class divide in the army to get firmly ingrained, which, if allowed unchecked, may lead to institutionalised demoralisation of jawans. The situation

today becomes more aggravated, especially in the wake that social media provides now an outlet to air such frustrations and helplessness felt by soldiers, and institutionalised disregard of the same can make the grievances even more deep rooted and pervasive. The instance at hand which has constrained the Petitioners to move this Hon’ble Court is directly related to the unnatural death of Gunner Roy Matthew whose heavily decomposed body was allegedly discovered just 50 metres away from his living quarters on March 2, 2017, after his being reported missing from February 25, 2017 when he allegedly made last contact with his wife over phone. The Petitioners, who provide a support system to the veteran jawans and their families, got involved from the time the dead body of deceased Roy Matthew was brought Trivandrum Airport on 04.03.2017 and are first hand witness to the concerted diabolical attempts by certain officers in the army to force and browbeat the poor, destitute, psychologically depressed and distressed family of deceased Matthew to prevent them from

raising any questions around the death of Matthew and accept it as a suicide. The officers deputed from Deolali Camp where the dead body of Roy Matthew was found and others acting at their behest made repeated attempts to somehow, by hook or crook, through a combination of inducements, fear and coercion, obtain a statement from the vulnerable family of deceased Roy Matthew to attribute suicide to the scribe who did the sting operation, which statements they failed to get in Kerala, as family steadfastly denied to give any untruthful statements. However, later, under constant and tremendous pressure the family succumbed partly when called to Deolali camp from 03.04.2017 to 08.04.2017, which have been signed by Petitioner 2 as a witness. Petitioners are throughout first hand witnesses and privy to all these happenings as they were helping the family, knowing bit of Marathi and Malayalam. Not only this, Petitioner No. 2 has signed as witness on most of the documents/statements obtained from the family by the police at Deolali Police Station.

Petitioners had throughout accompanied the family to the army camp, visited the scene of crime and on the basis of what they witnessed first hand are more than convinced that the unnatural death of Roy Matthew is not a suicide, the circumstances point to definite possibilities of foul play, which is not being allowed to be investigated due to direct interference, influence paddling and intimidations unleashed by these very officers whose conduct is directly open to questioning in the wake of circumstances surrounding unnatural death of Roy Matthew, and as such are interested parties in scuttling a fair and truthful investigation in the matter. That the Investigating officer of Deolali Police Station and others have ceded complete control of investigation and witnesses to these very officers is a conduct destructive of the Rule of Law and is a direct assault and interference in criminal justice system and the Rule of Law. The photographs of the dead body and the abandoned barrack seen by Petitioner No. 2 while accompanying the family are clear and cogent testimony to the theory of suicide being false and planted one and the subsequent attempts by Deolali camp officials and police bring out a desperate attempt to plant lies and falsehoods to falsely

pin blame on the scribe for abetting the suicide, to absolve themselves of any suspicion of wrongdoing. When the petitioners learnt through media reports on April 11, 2017, that the scribe who carried out the sting has filed a Writ Petition before this Hon’ble Court seeking the discontinuance of Sahayak system prevalent in the Army and have prayed for a fair court monitored investigation into the death of Gunner Roy Matthew whose unnatural death has been conveniently and falsely shown as suicide by the army officers in Deolali camp, Petitioners decided to approach this Hon'ble Court. The Petitioners, who are vitally interested in welfare of jawans and in the present case are uniquely positioned and armed with first hand information and insights relating to unnatural death of Roy Mathew, felt as responsible law abiding citizens duty bound to approach and assist this Hon’ble Court to ensure justice and ascertain and establish the truth in order to help sustain the abiding faith in the rule of law. Petitioners feel that their failure to approach this Hon’ble Court would have been a case of complicity in crime through silence and inaction and would have served to perpetuate injustice and may lead to

severe miscarriage of justice, besides being dereliction of their fundamental duties under the Constitution. Petitioners strongly believe this episode has created deep consternation in general amongst the jawans serving in the army amongst whom a sense of injustice is gaining ground as the army discipline and fear of retribution not only prevents them from airing their grievances, their minds are surrounded by fear and a sinking feeling that tomorrow their body may also be found hanging with a statement released as in the case of deceased Matthew stating that the soldier took his own life (extreme step) “due to the guilt factor of letting down his superiors or conveying false impression to an unknown individual” —sending out a message that airing of grievance will be branded a lie, and letting down officers by telling the truth is guilt so heavy, that only death can purge it. The hollowness of similar reasoning was summarily discarded by Parliamentary Standing Committee on Defence in its 31 st report while noting, “A representative of the Army categorically deposed before the Committee that the Jawans are not technically supposed to attend to the household duties at the

residence of the officers and the personnel attending to such duties do so due to their reverence.” Even with this feeling our brave heart soldiers serve dedicatedly is the highest glory of our army, which Petitioners pray and hope will abide for ever, which can only happen, if the hope for justice survives. The instant matter is of great Public importance as by way of present Public Interest Litigation, the Petitioners are praying for protection of Article 21 of the constitution of India guaranteeing right to life, which includes right to live with dignity. That vide the present petition the petitioners are not only seeking the discontinuance of Sahayak system prevalent in the Army but also seeking a fair, complete and thorough investigation into the death of Gunner Roy Mathew whose death has been shown as suicide by the army which does not seems to be the case. The Petitioners further prays this Hon’ble Court for issuance of appropriate directions to the respondents to ensure proper investigations into the death of Gunner Roy Mathew for the reasons that the Rule of law should not only be upheld but also that the deceased Gunner Roy Mathew and his family members

get justice. It is submitted that the issue which arise in the present petition requires urgent action because the Sahayak System as prevalent in Indian Army has been explicitly deprecated by the Parliamentary Standing Committee in its Report in 2009 which had recommended its discontinuance in future. That despite such recommendation the system of Sahayak has continued in Indian Army alone, although the Navy and Ariforce has discontinued the system Respondent No. 2 had issued a Circular dated 19.01.2017, wherein it has been clearly mandated that the Sahayaks are not to be ill-treated by the Officers. The issuance of Circular is indirect admission on part of Respondent No. 2 that there has been misuse of Sahayak/Buddy System. However no concrete steps have been taken to either discontinued the system on punish the erring officers.

The Petitioner no.1 is the retired army personnel and is the General Secretary of the “Welfare Association of Ex Army Aviation Technicians”. That the Petitioner no.2 is also aretired army personnel and President of the “Welfare Association of Ex

Army Aviation Technicians”.They both are actively involved in welfare activities for ex-army personnel. Hence this Petition. LIST OF DATES

Date

PARTICULARS

2009

That the Sahayak System as prevalent in Indian

Army

has

been

explicitly

deprecated by the Parliamentary Standing Committee in its Report in 2009 which has recommended its discontinuance in future.

11.12.2014

Welfare Association of Ex Army Aviation Technicians established. Petitioner 1 is the General Secretary of the Association and Petitioner 2 is the President

19.01.2017

The Respondent No. 1 had been compelled to

issue

a

circular

dated

19.1.2017

wherein it has been clearly mandated that the |Sahayaks are not to be ill-treated by the Officers. The issuance of the circular

is an indirect admission on the part of the Respondent No. 1 that there has been misuse of Sahayak/ Buddy system to a certain extent.

04.03.2017

Petitioners on 04.03.2017 read reports published in newspapers giving reference to press release by the Army that Roy Matthew, one of the jawans in sting video released on February 24, 2017 exposing misuse

of

sahayaks

in

Army

has

committed suicide “due to the guilt factor of letting down his superiors or conveying false

impression

to

an

unknown

individual”. Petitioners also learnt that the dead body of Gunner Roy Mathew would be arriving at the Trivandrum Airport in the morning of 04.03.2017 By flight from Mumbai. Accordingly Petitioner No.1 along with 6 members of his association on 04.03.2017

reached the Trivandrum airport at around 9.00 a.m. At the airport they met the family members of the deceased Gunner Roy Matthew who were also waiting there to receive the body of the deceased. Petitioners offered their condolences to the family members present there. That during the formal interaction with the family members Petitioner no.1 came to learn that deceased Gunner Roy Matthew was a strong man who having served the army for more than 13 years was planning his future after taking retirement on completion of 15 years in service and had also bought recently a plot of land to build a house and during his conversation on phone would talk about his future plans and therefore the family who knew him to be a strong man could not fathom any reason

for

him

to

commit

suicide,

certainly not the version advanced in the

press

release.

The

petitioner

no.1

interacted with the army jawans from Deolali camp accompanying the body of the Gunner Roy Mathew who confided to him that Matthew was a strong headed man and they feel it hard to swallow that he committed suicide for the reasons that he

had

unknowingly

interacted

with

journalist and talked about the jawans serving as sahayak attached to their officers. They also told the petitioner no.1 that there must have been something wrong as there was no reason for him to commit

suicide.

circumstances

That

raised

the

entire

apprehension

of

some foul play and therefore Petitioner no.1 and the entire family of the deceased got more suspicious about his death, as the attempt was being made by officials to take the body in a hurry to Pangoad Military Station and bury it forthwith.

Family members of the deceased and Petitioner no.1 along with his associates demanded body being taken for re-post mortem and waited for one hour at the airport to get body from Army to the local police. Local Police after receiving the body from the army, handed it over to the Trivandrum Medical college for a second postmortem.

19.03.2017

On 19.03.2017 Petitioners along with 6 members from his association went to the house

of

the

deceased

Gunner

Roy

Mathew in Kollam to convey condolences on behalf of the association and to extend support to the family. There Petitioner no.1 met Roy Mathew’s wife Finni, uncle Mr.Gracius, who also told Petitioner no.1 that there was no reason for Roy Matthew to commit suicide as he was planning his

future as he had already served 13 and half

years

in

the

army

and

after

completion of 15 years of service he would be eligible for pension and thereafter he would take voluntary retirement from the service. He had purchased land near by his house in December 2016 to construct a house. So there was no reason for him to commit suicide.

27.03.2017

On 27.03.2017 Mr.Gracius told Petitioner no.1 on phone that a Retired Major General had come to the house of the deceased

Gunner

25/26th March

Roy

(approx)

Mathew and

told

on the

family members that they have to sign all the relevant papers which Devlali army men will give them. While talking to them the said Major General tried to pressurize them to do as told by him. He also informed the Petitioner no.1 that on the

same day i.e. on 27.03.2017 (approx) two army

men

from

Devlali

reached

the

deceased Roy Mathew’s home in Kollam and asked the immediate family members i.e.

father,

mother

and

wife

of

the

deceased to sign the documents brought by them and also accompany them to Devlali to record their statements. The army men had brought with them some documents to be signed by the family members of the deceased. One of the documents, which was some kind of a form filled by pencil, hence the family refused

to

sign

the

form.

Another

document was a statement prepared by the army which stated that Roy Mathew had

hanged

himself

and

committed

suicide. The family also refused to sign this statement despite being pressurized by

the

army

men.

Mr.Gracius

also

informed the petitioner no.1 that on the

same day, one army man took the family to Sainik Board office in Kollam to get a counter sign of District Sainik Board officer but here too the Officer refused to sign the form for the reasons that it was filled by a pencil which could be changed later on.

03.04.2017

On 03.04.2017, around 11p.m. Petitioner No.2 George P.J. along with deceased Gunner Roy Mathew’s family reached Devlali as requested by the army. They were received by army officers namely Brigadier PradeepKaul and Brigadier Dey at the army guest named ‘B Mess’. These army officers expressed condolences to the family.

04.04.2017

That on 04.04.2017, the army officers took

the

family

members

and

the

Petitioner no.2 to show the places like the abandoned

barrack

where

deceased

Gunner Roy Mathew allegedly committed suicide and to his living quarters where he used to live. It is submitted that Petitioner no.2 and the family members were given a superficial and a hurried round of the places under the constant monitoring of the army men so that no one can take photographs of the crime scene and surroundings in a calm and contemplative manner.

However,

whatever

minimum

Petitioner no.2 and the family members were exposed to in a hurried manner was itself a tell-tale story and establish clearly the following:-

(a) That the room where body was found was bare and had no support from where deceased Mathew could have climbed to put the noose around his neck and then remove the support to end his life by hanging.

It

becomes

clear

from

the

photograph shown from the police record to the family and the Petitioner No. 2

(b) the abandoned barrack was so near to living barracks, that a body could have never been lying there for more than four days, the smell, stench of decomposition would have attracted jawans living in barracks hardly 50 metres away and animals like dogs certainly would have created alarm long time back.

(c) the barracks are supposed to be locked and

constantly

under

surveillance,

especially after Pathankot attack

(d) Roy Mathew was missing and a search was on for him

(e) the suicide note allegedly written by deceased Mathew read by the Petitioner appeared to him a dictated document, and read more like an apology, where no

express

intention

of

suicide

was

expressed, it mentioned time in a peculiar manner and is written in a very artificial language in terminology not normally used by a person like the deceased

(f) the police skirted showing video tape of scene of suicide, probably has not made it deliberately

(g) no record showing narration of who first noticed the body and reported it as is normally expected seems to be there and in any case has not been revealed to the family and Petitioner.

(h) two army officers, Col J V Javade and Major Aniket were at all times at the Police Station when statement of family was being recorded and were openly directing the I.O. in Marathi, that the statement must implicate the scribe otherwise it is of

no use, which Petitioner could overhear and understand 05.04.2017

On 05.04.2017 the family of the deceased along

with

Petitioner

no.2

met

the

Commandant of Devlali Camp Lt. General B.S.Salaria,

VSM

at

his

office.

He

expressed his deep condolences to the family and assured that the deceased wife will get a job and other benefits from the army within 3 months. This does not normally happen under the rules in a case of suicide.

From Commandant’s office the family members and Petitioner no.2 went to Devlali camp Police station to record their statements. Petitioner

At no.

investigating

the

police

2

observed

officer

API

station, that

the

Lokare

was

tutoring and forcing the deceased wife to sign a statement stating that the deceased

Gunner Roy Mathew committed suicide because of the video published by The Quint. At the police station, two army officers were also present while family members statements were recorded in their presence. These two officers were Colonel J.V. Javade, Col Administration of Devlali Cantonment and Major Aniket from

Administration

of

Devlali

Cantonment. These two army officers were constantly

instructing

ASI

Lokare

in

Marathi to prepare a statement which mentions the name of PoonamAgarwal, the journalist who did the story on Sahayek system prevailing in the army. These army officers said that the deceased wife should sign the statement which says that

the

because

deceased

committed

of

video

the

suicide

made

by

PoonamAgarwal. They also said that the statement would be meaningless without

mentioning PoonamAgarwal’s name. But the deceased wife refused to sign such a statement because she said that she never heard of PoonamAgarwal nor did the deceased ever mention this name to her. Despite deceased’s wife’s reluctance to sign such a statement, the police and the army officers coerced and forced her to sign on such a statement which was written in Marathi.

06.04.2017

On 06.04.2017, the family members along with Petitioner no. 2 were again called to the Devlali police station. The parents of Gunner Roy Mathew were made to sign another

statement

stating

that

the

deceased never had any problem while serving in the army and he committed suicide because of the video made by the journalist Poonam Agarwal. Petitioner 2 who

acted

as

a

translator

from

English/Hindi to Malyalam signed the statements as a witness.

07.04.2017

On 07.04.2017, the wife of Gunner Roy Mathew was called by Brigadier Gopi Iyar, who is conducting court of inquiry into the

unnatural

death

of

Gunner

Roy

Mathew for her statement. Petitioner no.2 was not allowed to be present in this meeting. After the meeting was over, the deceased wife told the Petitioner no.2 that here too she was forced to sign a similar statement as given to the police at Devlali.

08.04.2017

On 08.04.2017, around 11 a.m. morning, the family and the Petitioner no. 2 left for Mumbai in a car. They reached Mumbai around 5pm. From Mumbai the family and

the

Petitioner

2

took

train

to

Eranakulam.

11.04.2017

Petitioners

read

news

reports

about

Poonam

Agarwal

having

filed

Petition in this Hon’ble Court

21.04.2017

Hence the present Writ Petition

a

Writ

IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA CRIMINAL ORIGINAL JURISDICTION WRIT PETITION (Crl) NO.

OF 2017

(Petition under Article 32 of the Constitution of India) IN THE MATTER OF 1.

Chandrasekhara Pillai.s General Secretary,Welfare Association Of Ex Army Aviation Technicians s/o of Sivasankara Pillai, Age 54 years Occ. Ex. Serviceman / Businessman R/o TC 31/1173 (1) ThazhasseryPettah, P.O. Trivandrum, Kerala 695024 …Petitioner No.1

2.

Adv. George P.J. Age: 56 years, Occ.: Advocate President,Welfare Association of Ex Army Aviation Technicians Padinjarekara House Kaniyaram,P.O. Mananthavady Wayanad Kerala 670645

...Petitioner no.2

Versus 1.

2.

Union of India Through Secretary Ministry of Defence South Block, New Delhi

...Respondent No.1

The Chief of Army Staff, South Block, Integrated Headquaters of MOD ( Army) New Delhi-110011 …Respondent No.2

3.

4.

The Officer Incharge P.S. Devlali Camp District Nasik, Maharashtra

…Respondent No.3

State of Maharashtra Through Secretary Department of Home, Mantralaya…Respondent No.4 Mumbai. All are Contesting Respondents

WRIT PETITION UNDER ARTICLE 32 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA FOR PROTECTION OF RIGHT TO LIFE AS GUARANTEED UNDER ARTICLE 21 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA AND FOR SEEKING ISSUANCE OFWRIT/ WRITS / DIRECTIONS/ ORDER WRIT BEING IN THE NATURE OF MANDAMUS TO THE RESPONDENT NO. 1 AND 2 DIRECTING ABOLITION AND DISCONTINUATION OF THE SAHAYAK/ BUDDY SYSTEM AS PREVALENT IN THE INDIAN ARMY; AND FOR ISSSUANCE OF WRIT/WRITS / DIRECTIONS/ ORDER WRIT BEING IN THE NATURE OF MANDAMUS TO THE RESPONDENT NO. 1 AND 2 DIRECTING ABOLITION TO THE RESPONDENT NO. 1 TO INVESTIGATE THE UNNATURAL DEATH OF THE GUNNER ROY MATHEW IN A FAIR AND IMPARTIAL MANNER KEEPING IN VIEW ENTIRETY OF CIRCUMSTANCES AND MATERIAL S UNDER THE SUPERVISION OF THIS HON’BLE COURT

TO: THE

HON'BLE

THE

CHIEF

JUSTICE

AND

HIS

OTHER

COMPANION JUSTICES OF THE HON'BLE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA THE HUMBLE PETITION OF THE PETITIONERS

MOST RESPECTFULLY SHWETH: 1.

The present Writ Petition by way of Public Interest Litigation (PIL) under Article 32 of the Constitution of India is being filed raising an issue of great Public importance as by way of present Public Interest Litigation, the Petitioners

are praying for protection of Article 21 of the constitution of India guaranteeing right to life, which includes right to live with dignity. That vide the present petition the petitioners are not only seeking the discontinuance of Sahayak system prevalent in the Army but also seeking a fair, complete and thorough investigation into the death of Gunner Roy Mathew whose death has been shown as suicide by the army which does not seems to be the case. 1A. That the Petitioner has no personal gain, private motive or oblique reason in filing the present Public Interest Litigation. 2.

The Petitioner no.1 is the retired army personnel and is the General Secretary of the “Welfare Association of Ex Army Aviation Technicians”. The complete name and address of the Petitioner

is as mentioned above, the email address is [email protected] and his Pan card No. is AJKPP0354M and his income is about Rs. 4,50,000/- he has taxable income. That the Petitioner no.2 is also a retired army personnel and President of the “Welfare Association of Ex Army Aviation Technicians”. The complete name and address of the Petitioners is as mentioned above,

the

email

address

is

[email protected] and his income is about Rs. 3,50,000/-

pan card No. is

ALYPJ8017D

and his income below taxable limit. That there are no civil, criminal or revenue litigation involving the Petitioners which has or could have a legal nexus with the issues involved in the PIL. That the Petitioners have not approached the any authority seeking similar reliefs as prayed

for

in

the

present

Petition

in

view

of the

recommendations of the Standing Committee of Defence and the circular 19.01.2017. However in view of the emergent situations wherein one of the Sahayak has allegedly committed suicide, the Petitioners are filling the present Petition without waiting for making any formal representation to appropriate authorities. In fact both the Petitioners

are

actively

associated

with

“Welfare

Association of Ex Army Aviation Technicians” established on 11.12.2014 whichtakes care of the any retired Jawans and their families and helps and provide assistance to them. 3.

The Respondent No 1 is the Union of India through Ministry of Defence, Respondent No. 2 is the Chief of Army Staff, Respondent No 3 is Officer In-Charge of P.S. Devlali Camp, District Nasik Maharashtra and Respondent No.4 is State of Maharashtra through Department of Home.

4.

That vide the present Writ Petition the Petitioner is praying for issuance of Writ of Mandamus, Certiorari or any other appropriate Writ / order / direction as may be deemed fit and proper in facts and circumstances of the present Case,

for

abolition/discontinuation

of

Sahayak/Buddy system as well as for fair and impartial investigation into the death of Roy Mathew as it is not only relates to manipulating

evidence and hushing up criminal offences, but also point to systematic subversion of the Rule of Law and criminal justice system, if allowed to proceed unchecked. It is further stated that all the Respondents No. 1 to 4 are amenable to Writ jurisdiction under Article 32 of the Constitution as

all

the

Definition

of

Respondents State

in

come Article

within

the

12

the

of

Constitution of India. 5. The Sahayak System which is Colonial legacy as prevalent in Indian Army has been explicitly deprecated by the Parliamentary Standing Committee in its Report in 2009, as it amounts to exploitation of army jawan. That the Committee had recommended its discontinuance in future. Despite this recommendation the Respondent No. 1 and 2 has continued with the system and had failed to prevent its

misuse

and

ill-treatment

to

the

Jawans/Sahayaks/Soldiers. The system has no legal or practical rationale as the same has not arisen out of any Statute/Rules and Regulation andinfact the Air Force and Navy do not have any such system prevalent, which further

establishes the fact that there is a need to abolish the system. True copy of the extract from the report of the Standing Committee on Defence ( 2008-2009) ( Fourteenth LokSabha) Ministry of Defence on Stess Management in Armed Forces, Thirthy First Report is annexed hereto and marked as Annexure P 1 ( Pages ..... to ....... ) 6.

That the Respondent No. 2 and 3 had been compelled to issue a Circular no. 6413/15/A3 dated 19.01.2017 regarding ‘Dignity of serving soldier: Buddy Duties’, wherein it has been clearly mandated that the Sahayaks are not to be ill-treated by the Officers. The issuance of Circular is indirect admission on the part of Respondents that there has been misuse of Sahayak/Buddy System to certain

extent.

The

Circular

clearly

mandated

that

Sahayaks/Buddysare not to be taking care of Pets, nor they should look after children of officers and not to wash Pvt. Vehicles of Officers,that the Circular however do not provide for any action in case the misuse continues by the erring Officers as it states that the detailed guidelines regarding the subject is to be issued subsequently. That no

such detailed guidelines have been issued to the best of the knowledge of the Petitioners. Therefore it appears, that the

Circular

is

merely

an

eyewashcreated

by

the

Respondents without having any genuine concerns for the sufferings of the Sahayaks.True copy of the Circular no. 6413/15/A3

dated

19.01.2017

regarding

‘Dignity

of

serving soldier: Buddy Duties’ is annexed herewith and is marked as Annexure P-2 Pages (

to

).

6. That on the morning of 04.03.2017 Petitioners read in the newspaper about the death of Gunner Roy Mathew and that the dead body of Gunner Roy Mathew would be arriving at the Trivandrum Airport in the morning by flight from Mumbai.

Accordingly Petitioner No.1 along with 6

members of his association reached the Trivandrum airport at around 9.00a.m. in the morning. At the airport they met the family members of the deceased Gunner Roy Mathew who were also waiting there to receive the body of the deceased Gunner Roy Mathew and offered their condolences to the family members present there. That during the formal

interaction with the family members

Petitioner no.1 came to learn that deceased Gunner Roy Mathew was a strong man who was planning his future and had also bought land to build a house and during their

conversation

on

phone

would

talk

about

his

futureplan and therefore there was no reason for him to commit suicide. That the family members informed the petitioners that when someone from the family had called up army at Devlali, on 27.02.2017, it was informed by the army personal that Roy Methew is missing. And family members were informed on 02.03.2017 that Roy Methews dead body has been found and it has decomposed to great extents so they would like to bury him in Devlali itself. Hearing this the family members became suspicious. The petitioner

no.1

interacted

with

the

army

men

accompanying the body of the Gunner Roy Mathew and learned that he was a strong headed man who could not have committed suicide for the reasons that he had unknowingly interacted with journalist and talked about the jawans serving as sahayak attached to their officers. They also told the petitioner no.1 that there must have been something wrong as there was no reason for him to

commit suicide. That the entire circumstances raised apprehension of some foul play and therefore Petitioner no.1 and the entire family of the deceased got more suspicious about his death. Family members of the deceased and Petitioner no.1 along with his associates demanded for second post mortem of the body and waited for one hour at the airport to get body from Army to local police. Police after receiving the body from the army, handed it over to the Trivandrum Medical college for second postmortem. 7. That on 19.03.2017Petitioners along with 6 members from his association went to the house of the deceased Gunner Roy Mathew in Kollam to convey condolences on behalf of the association and to extend support to the family. There Petitioner no.1 met Roy Mathew’s wife, uncle Mr.Gracius, who told Petitioner no.1 that there was no reason for Roy Mathew to commit suicide as he was planning his future as he had already served 13 and half years in the army and after completion of 15 years of service he would be eligible for pension and thereafter he would take voluntary retirement from the service. He had purchased land near

by his house in December 2016 to construct a house. So there was no reason for him to commit suicide being a strong will man. 9.

That on 27.03.2017Mr.Gracius told Petitioner no.1 on phone that a Retired Major General had come to the house of the deceased Gunner Roy Mathew on 25/26 th March and told the family members that they have to sign all the relevant papers which Devlali army men will give them. While talking to them Major General pressurized them to do as told by him. He also informed the Petitioner no.1 that on the same day i.e. on 27.03.2017 two army men from Devlali reached the deceased Roy Mathew’s home in Kollam and asked the immediate family members i.e. father, mother and wife of the deceased to sign the documents brought by them and also accompany them to Devlali to record their statements. The army men had brought with them some documents to be signed by the family members of the deceased. One of the documents, which was some kind of a form filled by pencil, hence the family refused to sign the form. Another document was a

statement prepared by the army which stated that Roy Mathew had hanged himself and committed suicide. The family also refused to sign this statement despite being pressurized by the army men. Mr.Gracius also informed the petitioner no.1 that on same day one army man took the family to Sanik Board office in Kollam to get a counter sign of DistricSainik Board officer but here too the Officer refused to sign the form for the reasons that it was filled by a pencil which could be changed later on. 10.

That on 03.04.2017, around 11p.m. Petitioner No.2 George P.J. along with deceased Gunner Roy Mathew’s family reached Devlali as requested by the army. They were received by army officers namely Brigadier PradeepKaul and Brigadier Dey at the army guest named ‘B Mess’. These army officers expressed condolences to the family.

11. That on 04.04.2017, the army officers took the family members and the Petitioner no.2 to show the places like the abandoned barrack where deceased Gunner Roy Mathew committed suicide and to his living quarters where he used to live. It is submitted that Petitioner no.2 and the

family members were given a superficial and a hurried round of the places under the constant monitoring of the army men so that no one can take photographs of the crime scene and surroundings in a calm contemplated manner. However, whatever minimum Petitioner no.2 and the family members were exposed to in a hurried manner was itself a tell-tale story which clearly established that:

i.

That the room where body was found was bare and had no support from where deceased Mathew could have climbed to put the noose around his neck and then remove the support to end his life by hanging. It becomes clear from the photograph shown from the police record to the family and the Petitioner No. 2

ii.

That the abandoned barrack was so near to living barracks, that a body could have never been lying there for more than four days, the smell, stench of decomposition would have attracted jawans living in barracks hardly 50 metres away and animals like

dogs certainly would have created alarm long time back.

iii.

That the barracks are supposed to be locked and constantly

under

surveillance,

especially

after Pathankot attack.

iv.

That Roy Mathew was missing and a search was on for him so how could his body not be found for 4 days not far from place he lived

v.

That the suicide note allegedly written by deceased Mathew read by the Petitioner appeared to him a dictated document, and read more like an apology, where no express intention of suicide was expressed, it mentioned time in a peculiar manner and is written in a very artificial language in terminology not normally used by a person like the deceased

vi.

That the police skirted showing video tape of scene of suicide, probably has not made it deliberately

vii.

That no record showing narration of who first noticed the body and reported it as is normally expected seems to be there and in any case has not been revealed to the family and Petitioner.

viii. That

two

army

officers,

Col

J

V Javade and

Major Aniket were at all times at the Police Station when statement of family was being recorded and were openly directing the I.O. in Marathi, that the statement must implicate the scribe otherwise it is of no

use,

which

Petitioner

could

overhear

and

understand 12.

That on 05.04.2017 the family of the deceased along with Petitioner no.2 met the Commandant of Devlali Camp Lt. General B.S.Salaria, VSM at his office. He expressed his deep condolences to the family and assured that the deceased wife will get a job and other benefits from the

army within 3 months.From Commandant’s office the family members and Petitioner no.2 went to Devlali camp Police station to record their statements. At the police station, Petitioner no. 2 observed that the investigating officer API Lokare was tutoring and forcing the deceased wife to sign a statement stating that the deceased Gunner Roy Mathew committed suicide because of the video published by The Quint. At the police station, two army officers

were

also

present

while

family

members

statements were recorded in their presence. These two officers were Colonel J.V.Javade, Col Administration of Devlali Cantonment and Major Aniket from Administration of Devlali Cantonment. These two army officers were constantly instructing ASI Lokarein Marathi to prepare a statement which mentions the name of Poonam Agarwal, the journalist who did the story on Sahayeksystem prevailing in the army. These army officers said that the deceased wife should sign the statement which says that the deceased committed suicide because of the video made by Poonam Agarwal. They also said that the statement would

be

meaningless

without

mentioning

Poonam

Agarwal’s name. But the deceased wife refused to sign such a statement because she said that she never heard of Poonam Agarwal nor did the deceased ever mention this name to her. Despite deceased’s wife’s reluctance to sign such a statement, the police and the army officers coerced and forced her to sign on such a statement which was written

in

Marathi,

a

language

that

she

did

not

understand. 13.

That on 06.04.2017, the family members along with Petitioner no. 2 were again called to the Devlali Camp Police Station. The parents of Gunner Roy Mathew were made to sign another statement stating that the deceased never had any problem while serving in the army and he committed suicide because of the video made by the journalist PoonamAgarwal. Petitioner 2 who acted as a translator from English/Hindi to Malyalam signed the statements as a witness, and raised objdections to such coercion however, since the family members as well as the petitioner no. towere under constant pressure, they had no option but to sign.

14.

That on 07.04.2017,the wife of Gunner Roy Mathew was called by Brigadier Gopi Iyar, who is conducting court of inquiry into the unnatural death of Gunner Roy Mathew for her statement. Petitioner no.2 was not allowed to be present in this meeting. After the meeting was over, the deceased wife told the Petitioner no.2 that here too she was forced to sign a similar statement as given to the police at Devlali.

15.

That on 08.04.2017, around 11 a.m. morning, the family and the Petitioner no. 2 left for Mumbai in a car. They reached Mumbai around 5pm. From Mumbai the family and the Petitioner 2 took train to Eranakulam. That in view of the above facts and circumstances, the petitioners are filing the present Petition.

GROUNDS

A)

Because the petitioners, who are ex army personnel

running an association of ex army men in Kerala, alarmed by a concerted and a brazen attempt by certain serving delinquent officers in the army who have scant regard for the Rule of Law

and human values, which they have witnessed first hand, have been constrained to Public

Interest

prefer the instant Writ Petition by way of

Litigation

(PIL)

under

Article

32

of

the

Constitution of India in order to ensure that the fair name, reputation, image, trust and respect of Indian army as one of the most humane and disciplined armed forces in the world is not jeopardised by the misconduct of a few delinquents in its ranks.

These

officers,

in

order

to

cover

individual

misdemeanours and commission of suspected crimes are seeking to misuse the fair name of Indian army as an institution.

B)

Because the instant matter is of great Public importance

as such misconducts, coupled by some other recurring episodes of perceived unfairness, may lead to a feeling of class divide in the army to get firmly ingrained, which, if allowed unchecked, may lead to institutionalised demoralisation of jawans. The situation today becomes more aggravated, especially in the wake that social media provides now an outlet to air such frustrations and helplessness felt by soldiers, and institutionalised disregard

of the same can make the grievances even more deep rooted and pervasive.

C)

because the instance at hand which has constrained the

Petitioners to move this Hon’ble Court is directly related to the unnatural death of Gunner Roy Matthew whose heavily decomposed body was allegedly discovered just 50 metres away from his living quarters on March 2, 2017, after his being reported missing from February 25, 2017 when he allegedly made last contact with his wife over phone.

D) Because the Petitioners, who provide a support system to the veteran jawans and their families, got involved from the time the dead body of deceased Roy Matthew was brought Trivandrum Airport on 04.03.2017 and are first hand witness to the concerted diabolical attempts by certain officers in the army to force

and

browbeat

the

poor,

destitute,

psychologically

depressed and distressed family of deceased Matthew to prevent them from raising any questions around the death of Matthew and accept it as a suicide.

E) Because the officers deputed from Deolali Camp where the dead body of Roy Matthew was found and others acting at their behest made repeated attempts to somehow, by hook or crook, through a combination of inducements, fear and coercion, obtain a statement from the vulnerable family of deceased Roy Matthew to attribute suicide to the scribe who did the sting operation, which statements they failed to get in Kerala, as family steadfastly denied to give any untruthful statements.

F) Because later, under constant and tremendous pressure the family succumbed partly when called to Deolali camp from 03.04.2017 to 08.04.2017, which have been signed by Petitioner 2 as a witness. G)

Because

thePetitioners are throughout first hand

witnesses and privy to all these happenings as they were helping the family, knowing

bit of Marathi and Malayalam.

Petitioner No. 2 has signed as witness on most of the documents/statements obtained from the family by the police at Deolali Police Station.

H) Because Petitioners had throughout accompanied the family to the army camp, visited the scene of crime and on the basis of what they witnessed first hand are more than convinced that the unnatural death of Roy Matthew is not a suicide, the circumstances point to definite possibilities of foul play, which is not being allowed to be investigated due to direct interference, influence paddling and intimidations unleashed by these very officers whose conduct is directly open to questioning in the wake of circumstances surrounding unnatural death of Roy Matthew, and as such are interested parties in scuttling a fair and truthful investigation in the matter.

I) Because the Investigating officer of Deolali Police Station and others have ceded complete control of investigation and witnesses to these very officers is a conduct destructive of the Rule of Law and is a direct assault and interference in criminal justice system and the Rule of Law. I) Because photographs of the dead body and the abandoned barrack seen by Petitioner No. 2 while accompanying the family are clear and cogent testimony to the theory of suicide being false and planted one and the subsequent attempts by Deolali

camp officials and police bring out a desperate attempt to plant lies and falsehoods to falsely pin blame on the scribe for abetting the suicide, to absolve themselves of any suspicion of wrongdoing.

J)

Because when the petitioners learnt through media reports

on April 11, 2017, that the scribe who carried out the sting has filed a Writ Petition before this Hon’ble Court seeking the discontinuance of Sahayak system prevalent in the Army and have prayed for a fair court monitored investigation into the death of Gunner Roy Matthew whose unnatural death has been conveniently and falsely shown as suicide by the army officers in Deolali camp, Petitioners decided to approach this Hon'ble Court.

K)

Because the Petitioners, who are vitally interested in

welfare of jawans and in the present case are uniquely positioned and armed with first hand information and insights relating to unnatural death of Roy Mathew, felt as responsible law abiding citizens duty bound to approach and assist this Hon’ble Court to ensure justice and ascertain and establish the

truth in order to help sustain the abiding faith in the rule of law.

L) Because Petitioners feel that their failure to approach this Hon’ble Court would have been a case of complicity in crime through silence and inaction and would have served to perpetuate injustice and may lead to severe miscarriage of justice, besides being dereliction of their fundamental duties under the Constitution.

M)

Because the Petitioners strongly believe this episode has

created deep consternation in general amongst the jawans serving in the army amongst whom a sense of injustice is gaining ground as the army discipline and fear of retribution not only prevents them from airing their grievances, their minds are surrounded by fear and a sinking feeling that tomorrow their body may also be found hanging with a statement released as in the case of deceased Matthew stating that the soldier took his own life (extreme step) “due to the guilt factor of letting down his superiors or conveying false impression to an unknown individual” —sending out a message that airing of grievance will

be branded a lie, and letting down officers by telling the truth is guilt so heavy, that only death can purge it. N) Because the hollowness of similar reasoning was summarily discarded by Parliamentary Standing Committee on Defence in its 31st report while noting, “A representative of the Army categorically deposed before the Committee that the Jawans are not technically supposed to attend to the household duties at the residence of the officers and the personnel attending to such duties do so due to their reverence.”

Even with this

feeling our brave heart soldiers serve dedicatedly is the highest glory of our army, which Petitioners pray and hope will abide for ever, which can only happen, if the hope for justice survives.

O)

Because the petitioners arefiling thepresent petition as it

is matter of great Public importance as by way of present Public Interest Litigation, the petitioner is not only seeking the discontinuance of Sahayak system prevalent in the Army but also seeking the fair, complete and thorough investigation into the death of Gunner Roy Mathew whose death has been

conveniently shown as suicide by the army which is not the case.

P)

Because the Petitioner no.2 who had accompanied the

family members of the late Gunner Roy Mathew to Devlali as they had been called to record their statements, and was witness to the way the family members of the deceased were forced to record their statement in the way the army personnel tutored them against their will. All these circumstances raises apprehension in the mind of the petitioners that unnatural death of Gunner Roy Mathew is no ordinary death but is a fit case requiring a fair and impartial investigation.

Q)

Because Petitioner no.2 and the family

members were exposed to in a hurried manner some

evidence

and

photographs

which

establish clearly the following:-

i.

That the room where body was found was bare and had no support from where deceased Mathew could

have climbed to put the noose around his neck and then remove the support to end his life by hanging. It becomes clear from the photograph shown from the police record to the family and the Petitioner No. 2

ii.

That the abandoned barrack was so near to living barracks, that a body could have never been lying there for more than four days, the smell, stench of decomposition would have attracted jawans living in barracks hardly 50 metres away and animals like dogs certainly would have created alarm long time back.

ii.

That the barracks are supposed to be locked and constantly

under

surveillance,

especially

after Pathankot attack

iii.

That Roy Mathew was missing and a search was on for him so how could his body not be found for 4 days not far from place he lived

iv.

That the suicide note allegedly written by deceased Mathew read by the Petitioner appeared to him a dictated document, and read more like an apology, where no express intention of suicide was expressed, it mentioned time in a peculiar manner and is written in a very artificial language in terminology not normally used by a person like the deceased

v.

That the police skirted showing video tape of scene of suicide, probably has not made it deliberately

vi.

That no record showing narration of who first noticed the body and reported it as is normally expected seems to be there and in any case has not been revealed to the family and Petitioner.

vii.

That

two

army

officers,

Col

J

V Javade and

Major Aniket were at all times at the Police Station

when statement of family was being recorded and were openly directing the I.O. in Marathi, that the statement must implicate the scribe otherwise it is of no

use,

which

Petitioner

could

overhear

and

understand

R)

Because the jurisdiction of this Hon’ble Court under

Article 32 of the Constitution of India can not only be invoked for protection of one’s own fundamental rights but also for the protection and safeguarding the fundamental right to life and right to live with dignity of fellow beings.

S)

Because the Sahayak System as prevalent in Indian

Army has been explicitly deprecated by the Parliamentary Standing

Committee

in

its

Report

in

2009

which

had

recommended its dis-continuance in future. Despite this recommendation the Respondent No. 1 has continued with the system and had also failed to prevent its misuse and illtreatment to the Jawans/Sahayaks/Soldiers.

T)

Because the Sahayak system is a legacy of colonial rule,

which needs to be abolished. That infactthe Air Force and Navy do not have any such system prevalent. U)

Because the Circular dated 19.01.2017 has been issued,

wherein it has been clearly mandated that the Sahayaks are not to be ill-treated by the Officers. The issuance of Circular is indirect admission on part of Respondent No. 1 and 2 that there has been misuse of Sahayak/Buddy System to certain extent. The Circular clearly prohibited that Sahayaks/Buddys not to be taking care of Pets, nor look after children and in addition not to be doing washing of private Vehicles of Officers. Despite such circular being issued the Sahayaks have been rampantly illtreated, and instead of the Army Soldiers taking pride in dawning

uniform

are

subjected

to

undue

psychological

harassment and humiliation.

V)

Because, the prevalence of Sahayak system in Indian Army

is not premised on any legal provision, and as such is bad in law.

X)

That the Sahayak system is in violation of Article 14, 21

and 23 of the Constitution.

Y).

That the prevelance of Sahayak system is against the

doctrine of equality, as the deployment of a Army Jawan as Sahayak is not based on any criteria , the said position not being a commissioned post. That generally the Lower Ranks are deployed as Sahayaks and are subjected to undue harassment and exploitation.

Z).

That the Sahayak system must be abolished as although

the Army in response to a specific query put by the Parliamentary

Standing

Committee

on

Defence

on

the

deployment of lower ranks as Sahayaks had responded that, “Sahayaks are authorized to Officers and Junior Commissioned Officers in the Army when serving with units or Headquarters functioning on War Establishment. The scale of authorization of Sahayak is given below:- (i) One for every field officer and above. (ii) One for every two officers of the rank of captain and below (iii) One for every subedar major (iv) One for every two Junior Commissioned Officers of the rank of subedar and below. The

duties assigned to Sahayaks are as under:- (i) To provide personal protection and security. (ii) To attend telephones, receive and deliver messages during operations, training and exercise and in peace. (iii) To maintain weapons, uniforms and equipment

of

Officers/Junior

Commissioned

Officers

in

accordance with custom and usage in the Army. (iv) To assist in digging trenches, erect bivouacs and shelters during war, training or exercise while the leaders are more busy in planning, coordination and execution of operations. (v) To be of assistance during patrols and independent missions. (vi) To carry and operate radio sets, maps and other military equipment during operations, training cadres and outdoor exercises. No personnel in Navy and Air Force are deployed on duties as Batman/ Orderly/Sahayak.” However, the Committee had after thorough enquiry had specifically recommended that “10. The Committee understand that the practice of utilizing services of Jawans as Sahayaks is prevalent in the Army in one form or other since British days. It is learnt that numerous Jawans are engaged at the residence of some of the senior officers for domestic work and to serve the family members of officers. A representative of the Army categorically deposed before the Committee that the

Jawans are not technically supposed to attend to the household duties at the residence of the officers and the personnel attending to such duties do so due to their reverence. The Committee hardly need to stress that Jawans are recruited for serving the nation and not to serve the family members of officers in household work which is demeaning and humiliating. The Committee take a very serious view of the shameful practice which should have no place in the independent India. The Committee expect the Ministry of Defence to issue instructions to stop forthwith the practice, which lowers the self-esteem of Jawan. Any officer found to be violating the instruction in this regard be dealt with severely. Similar action needs to be taken by the Ministry of Home Affairs in respect of para military organisations and other organisations.”

AA). Because this Hon’ble Supreme Court in the matter of Francis Coralie Mullian vs. Administrator, Union Territory of Delhi reported in (1981) 1 SCC 608 had held that the right to life guaranteed under Article 21 of the Constitution means right to live with dignity.

BB). Because Article 23 of the Constitution guarantees rights against exploitation and prohibits forced labour. That it is submitted that a lower rank Jawan deployed as Sahayak when is made to do household chores of the officer is thereby being forced to do activities which is beyound the scope of his official assignment and thus leads to violation of Article 23 of the Constitution.

CC). That an inductee in army, however low the rank might be is inspired by the spirit of serving the nation and as such forcing him to do personal chores for the officer violates the sense of pride that a person has when joining Army and as such is violative of Article 19 (1) (g) of the Constitution. DD). That the Sahayak system needs to be abolished as no such system is prevelant in either Indian Air force and Indian Navy. EE). That the death of Gunner Roy Mathew may kindly be investigated upon as his death has been given the colour of suicide which does not seem to be the case and the facts and circumstances of the said case raise serious apperehension in the mind of the Petitioners that it is not a case of suicide.

FF) Becauise this Hon’ble Court has directed court monitored investigations in the past, if the situation so demands. That the Petitioners have firm belief that truth shall not come out form the in house enquiry carried out by the Army, as the Army officials have been forcing and coercing the family of the deceased Gunner Mathew to make statements that they do not personally believe to be correct. In such circumstance a fair and impartial investigation under the supervision of this Hon’ble Court shall sub serve the interest of justice and shall unravel the truth.

GG)

Petitioners crave leave of this Hon’ble Court to raise such

further grounds as are available to them during course of arguments.

16. The petitioners have not fi led any other petition seeking same reliefs in this Hon’ble Cour t or any other High Cour t in the countr y.

17. The Petitioners have no other alter nate equally effi cacious remedy than to approach this Hon’ble Cour t. 18. The Petitioner craves leave to alter, amend, delete any of the aforestated grounds if necessar y.

PRAYER

In light of the facts and circumstances of this case, the Petitioners prays that this Hon’ble Cour t may be pleased to:

a. allow the present petition and issue wr it/ wr its / direction/order,

wr it

being

in

the

nature

of

mandamus to the Respondent No. 1 and 2 directing abolition

and

discontinuation

of

the

Sahayak/

Buddy system as prevalent in the Indian Army; b. allow the present petition and issue wr it/ wr its / direction/order,

wr it

being

in

the

nature

of

mandamus to the Respondent No. 1 and 2 directing the

implement

Committee

on

the Thirty first report of ‘Standing Defence

(2008-2009)

(Fourteenth

LokSabha), Ministry of Defence on Stress Management in Armed Forces.

c. issue Wr it of mandamus in nature of directing the Respondent

No.

1

to

investigate

the

unnatural

death of the Gunner Roy Mathew in a fair and impar tial

manner

keeping

in

view

entirety

of

circumstances and mater ials under the super vision of this Hon’ble Cour t; and, d. Issue a wr it of Mandamus or any other appropr iate wr it, order or direction to Respondents to ensure protection to the Petitioners as well as the family members of Gunner Roy Mathew from any threat, force or coercion under the direct super vision of this Hon’ble Cour t; and

e. For such other and fur ther reliefs as this Hon’ble Cour t may deem fi t to grant in the circumstances of the case.

AND FOR THIS ACT OF KINDNESS, THE PETITIONER AS IN DUTY BOUND SHALL EVER BE GRATEFUL.

Drawn By: TRIVENI POTEKAR Advocate

FILED BY: SHAHID ANWAR

Drawn on: 20.04.2017 Filed on:22.4.2017

Advocate for the Petitioner

ANNEXURE P-1 STANDING COMMITTEE ON DEFENCE (2008 – 2009) (FOURTEENTH LOK SABHA) MINISTRY OF DEFENCE STRESS MANAGEMENT IN ARMED FORCES THIRTY FIRST REPORT (Pg No. 42) of the Report “Abolition of practice of domestic ‘Sahayaks’ 10. The Committee understand that the practice of utilizing services of Jawans as Sahayaks in prevalent in the Army in one form or other since British days. It is learnt that numerous

Jawans are engaged at the residence of some of the senior officers for domestic work and to serve the family members of officers. A representative of the Army categorically deposed before the Committee that the Jawans are not technically supposed to attend to the household duties at the residence of the officers and the personel attending to such duties do so due to their reverence. The Committee hardly need to stress that Jawans are recruited for serving the nation and not to serve the family members of officers in household work which is demaning and humiliating. The Committee take a very serious view of the shameful practice which should have no place in the independent India. The Committee expect the Ministry of Defence to issue instructions to stop forthwith the practice, which lowers the self-esteem of Jawan. Any officer found to be violating the instruction in this regard be dealt with severely. Similar action needs to be taken by the Ministry of Home Affairs in respect of para military organisations and other organisations.” TRUE COPY

6413/15/A3

ANNEXURE P-2 HQ 27 Mtn Div Pin – 908427 C/o 99 APO 19

Jan, 2017 List A, B, C, E & F DIGNITY OF SERVING SOLDIER : BUDDY DUTIES 1.

Ref recent social media outburst by serving soldier and

media statement issued by the COAS thereto. 2.

All fmns and units are requested to ensure that dignity of

serving soldier be maint, and emp. on buddy duties with offrs &

JOCs to be restd to entitled duties only. The fwg actions will be strictly implemented and envt be sensitized accordingly:a) Buddies not to be detailed for looking after the Pets. b) Buddies not to look after toddlers/children. c) Buddies not to be detailed for washing pvt vehs of offrs/JCOs 3.

In addition to the above, it will ensured that the buddies are

not detailed for any other menial jobs and are treated with utmost dignity. Detailed guidelines on the subject shall be issued subsequently. 4.

This letter may please be put up to Cdr/CO for perusal and

issue of necessary instrs. 5.

Please

confirm

receipt

of

this

letter

and

necessary

compliance action. Sd/(Bhawesh Malhotra) Lt. Ocl AAG For – GOC Copy to :HQ 33 Corps (A) For info wrt telecom betn Col A your HQ and AAG HQ of 18 Jan 17. Internal List D - For info strict compliance please. TRUE COPY

MD SHAHID ANWAR Advocate ON-Record Ch. No. 308, C.K. Daftary Block, Supreme Court of India M.No. 9811898482

Dated : 22.04.2017 AUTHORITY LETTER To, The Registrar Supreme Court of India New Delhi In Re: Chandrasekhara Pillai.s & Anr. Vs. Union of India & Ors. Sir, I hereby authorized to Ms. Triveni Poteker, Advocate to file/re-file, argue and other miscellaneous work in the above mentioned matter on behalf of me. Hence this authority letter. Thanking You, Yours Sincerely, MD. SHAHID ANWAR

IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA (ORIGIINAL CRIMINAL JURISDICITON)

WRIT PETITION (CRL)………/2017 IN THE MATTER OF: Mr. Chandrasekhar Pillai& another …… Petitioners Vs. Union of India &Ors.

……. Respondents AFFIDAVIT

I,

Mr.ChandrasekharaPillai.s

SivasankharaPillai,

aged

54

Years,

s/o Ex-

serviceman/ Business, R/o ThazhasseryPettah,

P.O.

TC 31/1173 (1)

Trivandrum

Kerala

695024, do hereby solemnly affirm and state as under:

1. That I am the petitioner no.1 in the present Writ Petition and being conversant with facts of the case, I am duly competent to swear this affidavit. 2. That the accompanying Writ Petition under Article 32 of the Constitution of India, has been drafted under my instructions and the contents of para ___ to ___ of the Writ Petition are true and correct to be best of my knowledge and nothing material has been concealed therein. 3. That the Annexure P-1 to P-2 at pages …. to …. field along with the Writ Petition are true copies of their respective originals. 4. That the Petitioner has no personal gain, private motive or oblique reason in filing the present Public Interest Litigation.

5. That the contents of my above affidavit are true and correct to my knowledge and belief and nothing has been concealed there from.

DEPONENT

VERIFICATION I, the above named deponent, do here by verify and state on solemn affirmation that the contents mentioned above are true and correct to my knowledge and no part of it is false and nothing material has been concealed therein.

Verified at New Delhi, on this 21 day of April, 2017

DEPONENT.

IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA (ORIGIINAL CRIMINAL JURISDICITON)

WRIT PETITION (CRL)………/2017 IN THE MATTER OF: Mr. Chandrasekhar Pillai& another …… Petitioners Vs. Union of India &Ors.

……. Respondents AFFIDAVIT

I, George P.J.

S/o. Late Shri P.V. Joseph

Age: 56 years, Occ.: Advocate President, Welfare Association of Ex Army Aviation Technicians Padinjarekara

House

MananthavadyWayanad

Kaniyaram, Kerala

670645

P.O. do

hereby solemnly affirm and state as under:

1. That I am the petitioner no.2 in the present Writ Petition and being conversant with facts of the case, I am duly competent to swear this affidavit.

2. That the accompanying Writ Petition under Article 32 of the Constitution of India, has been drafted under my instructions and the contents of para ___ to ___ of the Writ Petition are true and correct to be best of my knowledge and nothing material has been concealed therein. 3. That the Annexure P-1 to P-2 at pages …. to …. filed along with the Writ Petition are true copies of their respective originals. 4. That the Petitioner has no personal gain, private motive or oblique reason in filing the present Public Interest Litigation.

5. That the contents of my above affidavit are true and correct to my knowledge and belief and nothing has been concealed there from.

DEPONENT

VERIFICATION

I, the above named deponent, do here by verify and state on solemn affirmation that the contents mentioned above are true and correct to my knowledge and no part of it is false and nothing material has been concealed therein.

Verified at New Delhi, on this 21 day of April, 2017

DEPONENT.